Royse777 is Casino Critique

[JollyGood]

Absolutely, though if it concerns problems with Casino Critique itself I don't think I could be of much help.  But I'm going to remain optimistic that there's not going to be any need for that.  I'm also hoping the project turns out to reach some level of success--but I get the feeling that whether that happens or not depends on the team raising enough money to get started, and like I said, judging from the number of chips sold so far there hasn't been much interest.

If they really had a vision for the website and business they would make it happen even if they raised nothing more than the 0.005 BTC that already sits in their balance. I believe that address is theirs.

I do know that much of what's on the roadmap is vague, and CC's revenue goals are lofty to say the least.  I think if they laid out a concrete plan with details as to how they're going to attract partners, sponsors, advertisers, and whatever else it might make it way more enticing to potential investors.  I think I suggested something like that when I was doing my editing.

The real test for the team would be to openly announce who the other members are and then be ready face questions if they are asked. After that, they should be clear with their roadmap. They have not stated exactly who else beyond the 11 names mentioned are involved in the project and in which capacity.

The thing is, people have become jaded by all the scam ICO projects that promised everything and delivered nothing that they're reluctant to buy into some profit-sharing program that doesn't have a detailed prospectus, trusted bitcointalk members or not.

That is the way it is. Scammers made off with phenomenal amounts of money via sham coin and token offerings.

If people are reluctant now it is because applying caution is far better than blindly jumping in. The days of launching an STO, IEO, ICO and other fundraising events to dupe gullible investors are over, the days of tokens and coins being sold to make teams wealthy while investors lost out such as in 2017 and 2018 are over.

You are right, having detailed prospectuses will not help (but nor will having a part-anonymous team).

[1714517127]

1714517127

[1714517127]

1714517127

[DireWolfM14]

The days of launching an STO, IEO, ICO and other fundraising events to dupe gullible investors are over, the days of tokens and coins being sold to make teams wealthy while investors lost out such as in 2017 and 2018 are over.

I wish I had your optimism, but I don't.  The days of gullible investors on Bitcointalk.org might be over, but that's because we've become a bubble of jaded cynics.  All you have to do is look at all the ads on coinmarketcap, twitter, or the plethora of blockchain explorers to see that they're still going strong.  If those ads weren't working, no one would pay to place them there.  The majority of people are not as experienced with these tricks and scams, and still fit the "gullible" description.

Case in point: https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/investors-scramble-to-recoup-money-from-23-year-old-crypto-king-who-allegedly-owes-35-million-1.6078121

[nakamura12]

This thread of yours will soon die or buried by other threads unless you provide proofs that what you claim is true or correct and he has some help from DT members. To be exact, you are wrong about the part where you stated that DT members are helping to hide him from getting expose of what you claim about the things he did. I am sure that not all DT members are helping because I know some DT members have nothing to do with it. If it turns out to be a scam when their goal in raising 7 BTC as calculated by LoyceV through selling chips then you are free to start a scam accusation. After all, you won't be able to do anything about it unless you spend money like to bring it to the court if you can afford the cost. It is true that a few years back, many projects and even casinos before start a fundraising by selling tokens which in the end, many are scammed because of it.

[LoyceV]

The days of launching an STO, IEO, ICO and other fundraising events to dupe gullible investors are over, the days of tokens and coins being sold to make teams wealthy while investors lost out such as in 2017 and 2018 are over.

Judging by the activity of the Bounties (Altcoins) board, the token spam is still very profitable.

You are right, having detailed prospectuses will not help

The real problem, in my opinion, is that most "investors" don't care what they're investing in. Ever since 2017 it struck me as weird that the simplest idea tries to raise $100 million, and none of the investors seems to realize that's enough money to buy thousands of luxory cars.

(but nor will having a part-anonymous team).

Being anonymous isn't necessarily bad. I'm more or less anonymous, and so are you. Most Mods too, and so is Satoshi. That's fine with me.

[JollyGood]

Judging by the activity of the Bounties (Altcoins) board, the token spam is still very profitable.

I do not know if it is very profitable but it seems to be highly active in that board. If scammers cast a wide net and manage to pull in just one or two victims from thousands of potentials, then it means they will keep doing it in the hope of increasing numbers.

The real problem, in my opinion, is that most "investors" don't care what they're investing in. Ever since 2017 it struck me as weird that the simplest idea tries to raise $100 million, and none of the investors seems to realize that's enough money to buy thousands of luxory cars.

Those days of 2017/2018 are over, only a tiny minority of fundraiser projects will be able to sell coins and tokens to make millions of USD$ for themselves now.

Being anonymous isn't necessarily bad. I'm more or less anonymous, and so are you. Most Mods too, and so is Satoshi. That's fine with me.

It is fine with me too until the point I invest in a project, at that point I want to know who I am dealing with.

Anonymity does not have to be necessarily bad, I agree with that statement but in the end if investors or potential investors want to know the names of the full team behind his Casino Critique project it should be disclosed. If for some reason they do not want to disclose the names they really should disclose the real reasons why they are refusing to disclose the names of the people behind their project.

[LoyceV]

if investors or potential investors want to know the names of the full team behind his Casino Critique project it should be disclosed.

I have a different opinion: if investors want something that the other party doesn't want to give, they shouldn't invest.

[JollyGood]

You are welcome to your view and I am welcome to my mine. Anyway, regardless of the view, that is probably one of the many reasons why they have 0.005 BTC in their address which equates to less than $100

Are you rushing to invest and in the process add to their 0.005 BTC haul?

if investors or potential investors want to know the names of the full team behind his Casino Critique project it should be disclosed.

I have a different opinion: if investors want something that the other party doesn't want to give, they shouldn't invest.

[virasog]

Royse777 has been caught, no matter how hard his buddies try to hide him.

After Bitlucy777 fiasco, he is now back with Casino Critique trying to raise 10 BTC, in collusion with his DT friends.

Let's hope no one is foolish enough to throw their money away.

I have just one query from OP or anyone else is that lets's suppose Royse777 start a setup for Casino Critique and is raising 10 btc or 100 btc for his start up? What is the problem with it ?
Isn't it everyone's right to raise any money for their project and if anyone is a popular member of bitcointalk doing it, then what is wrong with it?
I just fail to understand the concern here 

[AB de Royse777]

I just fail to understand the concern here  

You will need to realize who is obsessed with Royse to understand the concern.

Who are these following users?
Royse777isCasinoCritique, notwhatyouthink, Zalima Zohair.

Who is the known account behind these unknown usernames? How can anyone describe why all these accounts has a common interest?

Let's add some clue.
JollyGood is the only known account who is bitching against Royse all the time. He needed it, after all his campaign against 1xbit was losing traction. Question here: who is going to be his next hunt?

[The Sceptical Chymist]

If people are reluctant now it is because applying caution is far better than blindly jumping in. The days of launching an STO, IEO, ICO and other fundraising events to dupe gullible investors are over, the days of tokens and coins being sold to make teams wealthy while investors lost out such as in 2017 and 2018 are over.

I wasn't criticising anyone's jadedness by any means, believe me.  People have good reason to look on any crypto project with extreme skepticism because of all the BS that went on during the ICO mania and all the crap ideas and outright scams that said mania birthed.  

You are right, having detailed prospectuses will not help (but nor will having a part-anonymous team).

There's only one member who's choosing to remain anonymous (at least as far as I know), and personally I don't think that's too big a deal since all the money CC collects isn't being held by just one person, and also because there are some reputable members attached to the CC project.  Even if it was just Hhampuz and DireWolfM14 running the show, I'd trust that this isn't some rip-off attempt.  But that's just my opinion, and once again I'm remaining neutral.  My point is that the member who's behind the official CC account isn't of huge importance; the other members obviously trust him/her, and there's an escrow team in place to safeguard the project's funds.

That said, it would be so much better if that person disclosed their identity.  It'd put this discussion to bed at the very least.

if investors or potential investors want to know the names of the full team behind his Casino Critique project it should be disclosed.

I have a different opinion: if investors want something that the other party doesn't want to give, they shouldn't invest.

Well, that's what it's going to boil down to in any case.  I'm not sure if the small amount that's been raised so far is due to this controversy or not, but I bet it's not helping.

(but nor will having a part-anonymous team).

Being anonymous isn't necessarily bad. I'm more or less anonymous, and so are you. Most Mods too, and so is Satoshi. That's fine with me.

That's true, but by our actions we and others have built up reputations over the years without requiring our identities to be known.  I think you'd agree that a bitcointalk username is associated with a certain reputation, assuming one has been established.  So if you don't even know someone's online identity, you can't gauge how trustworthy they are.

But as I've stated before, aside from the one anonymous member the other team members are known.

[AB de Royse777]

all the money CC collects isn't being held by just one person

Don't be surprised if the next new reputation topic from JollyGood and his alts is something like this:
"All escrow team members are alt of Royse777"

It's possible from the stupidity level of JollyGood.
Months before he was seeing 1xbit to everything, now he is seeing Royse777 in everywhere.

[DireWolfM14]

That said, it would be so much better if that person disclosed their identity.  It'd put this discussion to bed at the very least.

Would it?  I'm not so sure.  There're a lot of personalities in this forum, not everyone is going to like everyone.  Hell, even Switzerland has made some enemies, and he's about the most even-keeled AI human I've encountered on the interwebs.

Besides, I don't think anyone on the CC team is going to disclose their real name.  The only thing these trolls are asking for is a different, anonymous bitcointalk user name.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Would it?  I'm not so sure.  There're a lot of personalities in this forum, not everyone is going to like everyone.  Hell, even Switzerland has made some enemies, and he's about the most even-keeled AI human I've encountered on the interwebs.

I don't know for sure, and I'm not sure how many people are on the fence about investing in CC, with the deciding factor being the single member of the team remaining anonymous.  Now that I'm writing that thought out, it probably doesn't matter too much--but at the very least it'd put this controversy (no matter what its importance) to rest.

Besides, I don't think anyone on the CC team is going to disclose their real name.  The only thing these trolls are asking for is a different, anonymous bitcointalk user name.

No, of course they're not.  But as I said, even without knowing the legal names of the people behind the bitcointalk usernames, those usernames have positive/neutral/negative reputations associated with them.  If this was a project where they said they weren't even naming the team by their bitcointalk usernames, I'm pretty sure there would be no faith that it wouldn't turn out to be a scam (and rightfully so).

[JollyGood]

Royse777 has been caught, no matter how hard his buddies try to hide him.

After Bitlucy777 fiasco, he is now back with Casino Critique trying to raise 10 BTC, in collusion with his DT friends.

Let's hope no one is foolish enough to throw their money away.

I have just one query from OP or anyone else is that lets's suppose Royse777 start a setup for Casino Critique and is raising 10 btc or 100 btc for his start up? What is the problem with it ?
Isn't it everyone's right to raise any money for their project and if anyone is a popular member of bitcointalk doing it, then what is wrong with it?
I just fail to understand the concern here  

The OP should answer this but I probably speak for most when saying in essence every member operating a legitimate project should freely be allowed to try to fundraise.

Maybe the OP was a victim of the Bitlucy/Royse777 scam therefore he is holding grudges or maybe he does not want a scam to take place but I am curious about why he is convinced Royse777 is a hidden member of this particular project. If Royse777 is not connected to this project then the OP is bringing unnecessary attention here but if Royse777 is connected then by all means the OP can raise concerns because after all the Bitlucy/Royse777 scam did occur.

I hope the OP would clarify his position and post using their real account.

~yawn~

You are wrong. I am not using alt-accounts to either discredit you or to keep highlighting the Bitlucy/Royse777 scam.

I wasn't criticising anyone's jadedness by any means, believe me.  People have good reason to look on any crypto project with extreme skepticism because of all the BS that went on during the ICO mania and all the crap ideas and outright scams that said mania birthed.

These are virtually my sentiments exactly.

There's only one member who's choosing to remain anonymous (at least as far as I know), and personally I don't think that's too big a deal since all the money CC collects isn't being held by just one person, and also because there are some reputable members attached to the CC project.  Even if it was just Hhampuz and DireWolfM14 running the show, I'd trust that this isn't some rip-off attempt.  But that's just my opinion, and once again I'm remaining neutral.  My point is that the member who's behind the official CC account isn't of huge importance; the other members obviously trust him/her, and there's an escrow team in place to safeguard the project's funds.

That said, it would be so much better if that person disclosed their identity.  It'd put this discussion to bed at the very least.

You mentioned the names, let me comment. I have a lot of time for Hhampuz but lost any little respect I had left for DireWolfM14 some time back. Even if a reputable member was acting as escrow I would dismiss that as a plus-point for a project because he was not part of the team really and controlled no notion of where the project was going, he would just be collecting his commission on escrows.

If there is just one member remaining anonymous and if that member happened to be associated with a scam casino a few months ago in capacity of Partner and Marketing Director and made bold claims putting their own reputation on the line then it is clear nobody especially well respected members should backing the project.

I understand your perspective when you say the name remaining anonymous is not a big deal because an escrow account collects the funds and there are other reputable members who trust the anonymous one. For me it is not enough to either trust the project or believe it will be successful.

I have a different opinion: if investors want something that the other party doesn't want to give, they shouldn't invest.

Well, that's what it's going to boil down to in any case.  I'm not sure if the small amount that's been raised so far is due to this controversy or not, but I bet it's not helping.

That sort of secrecy would not help at all but thus far the balance in their address is still steady at 0.005 BTC, most probably a team member deposited it there.

But as I've stated before, aside from the one anonymous member the other team members are known.

Though several members have decided to keep the name quiet, that anonymous member seems to have let the cat out of the bag themselves. Thank you for mentioning it was just one member. Hopefully they will attach their username to the project and provide reasons why they wanted to remain in the shadows.

As the days go by, if I see this project releasing notes and there is merit to it I would be a strong backer but right now I see nothing that makes me see this as a potential business.

[DireWolfM14]

@JollyGood, I don't need you to respect me.  I have enough self-respect for both of us.

Speaking of self-respect, one lesson I pushed onto my children; self-respect can often be demonstrated by one's ability to take criticism.  

[AB de Royse777]

~yawn~

You are wrong. I am not using alt-accounts to either discredit you or to keep highlighting the Bitlucy/Royse777 scam.

Yawn LOL
How could you deny some data.

Just look at your post history. Last one week how many posts you made and how many of them are related to me. Go and count the numbers.

Look at the number of posts you made in this topic, look at the number of posts you made on the bitlucy withdrawal topic, look at other topics created related to me. Who has the most number of responses?

You are obsessed with me. How could anyone will not suspect that all those alt are not you just to create new conversion when another conversation is dead. You are even talking to yourself just to create conversation. See.

All these you are doing to discredit my reputation, you are doing good though. Wherever you are having chance you are not missing it to insult me. Meta, reputation, scam accusation, gambling which board you left untouched? Why wouldn't you? After all I am your new subject after 1xbit.

You are obsessed about me, obsessed to discredit everything I have done and do or will do. Do yourself a favor, before lying check your data to back that come out from pressing your keyboard. Something tells me, in real life you are a frustrated loser living a lonely life.

[JollyGood]

I have added you back where you belong on my ignore list along with the tiny clique of trolls that chased me for a while before giving up and all because I refused to believe your nonsense related to the Bitlucy/Royse777 scam 

Yawn LOL

[AB de Royse777]

ignore list along with the tiny clique of trolls that chased me for a while before giving up

Frightened?
I thought I was in your ignore list from long time including others, what changed in between?

I love my dog, we are good friends and loyal. when sometimes it asks too much attention I fake my anger. It then hides behind the doors and pretends not seeing me. My dog is not coward. It observes me and waits for its time to start playing again.

Having me in the ignore list is another lie from you. You only use the word and use it when you are unable to have a liberal discussion. It's a trick for you when you are running out of your nonsense arguments. You did not have any answer for my last post because the data shows you are a liar. So like my dog, you are watching and patiently pretending that you are not seeing the posts until I cool off.

Stop playing your word games in topics/posts related to me from any of your accounts. Whatever you had to say you said it in my trust page. I don't hide behind ignore list excuse so I will find you and response your nonsense accordingly. Coward!

[NYMIE]

Royse777 has been caught, no matter how hard his buddies try to hide him.

After Bitlucy777 fiasco, he is now back with Casino Critique trying to raise 10 BTC, in collusion with his DT friends.

Let's hope no one is foolish enough to throw their money away.

I don't know Royse777 and I don't want to say you are right and Royse777 is wrong or you are wrong and Royse777 is right. What I want to say is that you dare not reveal the sins of others with your real account. From my point of view, you look like a coward.

[AnotherAlt]

Oh, I didn't notice Royse777 was already here.
So, You are started responding to him again? What's the point? Do you believe you will be able to satisfy him? If so, You are wrong. TrollyBag is not going to stop. Now, I am a bit suspicious about Casino Critique and TrollyBag. Why do I feel like Mr. JollyBad is behind the project and doing all this drama just to promote the platform and spread it over the forum?